Google forbids facial recognition apps on Glass in the name of privacy

If you run into a complete stranger wearing Google Glass, that person might take your picture with just a wink. But rest assured that Glass probably won't be able to tell its wearer your name, date of birth, and turn-offs.

In a Google+ post Friday, the Project Glass team noted that "many have expressed both interest and concern around the possibilities of facial recognition in Glass." For now, Google is playing it safe on facial recognition. "As Google has said for several years, we won’t add facial recognition features to our products without having strong privacy protections in place," Google said. "With that in mind, we won’t be approving any facial recognition Glassware at this time."

The company also updated its Google Glass developer policies to reflect the change. "Don't use the camera or microphone to cross-reference and immediately present personal information identifying anyone other than the user, including use cases such as facial recognition and voice print," the document says. "Applications that do this will not be approved at this time."

Moreover, the policy states that the Google Glass display (a light above the eye) must stay on when the device is capturing pictures or videos. This makes it a little less likely that a Glass user could take pictures or video of someone without them realizing it (provided the person being recorded knows that the display light means the camera is active).

Developers could still attempt to gain root access to Glass's operating system and install applications that violate the rules, of course. But those applications wouldn't be distributed through official channels, limiting their adoption. Still, Google has encouraged developers to hack Glass, saying "we intentionally left the device unlocked so you guys could hack it and do crazy fun shit with it." Android generally allows users to sideload applications not available through the official app store, and Glass is based on Android.

A group of congressmen recently sent Google a list of questions about Google Glass and its potential impact on privacy. Among those queries: "When using Google Glass, is it true that this product would be able to use Facial Recognition Technology to unveil personal information?" At least for now, that question is answered.

95 Reader Comments

Developers could still attempt to gain root access to Glass's operating system and install applications that violate the rules, of course. But those applications wouldn't be distributed through official channels, limiting their adoption.

So instead of me getting a helpful application that would let me remember people I've only met once or twice, the only people who'll be using it for facial recognition purposes are the ones that will be abusing the technology to stalk/harass/swindle people.

Well, there goes any reason I had for wanting to use Google Glass. I am terrible at remembering faces and names. I'd love a virtual butler whispering things in my ear about the people I meet, based on the last time I met them. "Remember Jenny, you saw her last July 4th at a work party and you talked about her husband's startup".

With technology like this, I really don't see what rules/governance is going to really accomplish other than potentially kill the technology as a whole. You're either going to have back door (root + sideload) apps which skirt the rules and makes people into felons, or you can make the technology useful to everybody. The problem becomes now that we get to sit on our hands and wait for the government, which really doesn't have much of a track record of seeing beyond their special interest wallets, to decide whether or not such technology steps on their toes or not.

"Not to bring anybody down... but seriously... we intentionally left the device unlocked so you guys could hack it and do crazy fun shit with it," Google engineer Stephen Lau wrote. "I mean, FFS, you paid $1500 for it... go to town on it. Show me something cool."

That is quite literally the only useful feature of Glass I could think - integration with my contacts so that I can know who I'm talking to. Those of use with poor facial memory need all the help we can get.

Glass wearers are pretty obvious now, but what are people going to do when it fits invisibly inside a regular pair of eyeglasses?

Actually, it'll work better. Prohibition couldn't work against the vast popular demand for the product. This is akin to Congress prohibiting sales tax instead of alcohol. Who's going to complain except for the few accountants that depend on it?

Wouldn't that be EXACTLY what this product should be used for by Security teams?

I mean .. military / federal usage aside, even private security firms in certain environments would benefit from this. You can make yourself a fake ID but if the security guard doesn't the same details pop up in his "Iron Man" esque HUD when looking at you then you got to answer some questions.

Kind of silly and shortsighted, but I can see how it's necessary to appease the luddites and calm people enough that stupid legislation isn't passed. There's basically zero chance this restriction won't be lifted once Glass gets out there and people see the world doesn't actually end.

It always amazes me how ignorant of the world around them people are. Are you aware there's a very good chance that any cop car passing you is scanning your license plate and doing an automatic lookup? That's something a lot scarier than a private citizen doing a facial recognition search so they can remember your name.

With technology like this, I really don't see what rules/governance is going to really accomplish other than potentially kill the technology as a whole. You're either going to have back door (root + sideload) apps which skirt the rules and makes people into felons, or you can make the technology useful to everybody. The problem becomes now that we get to sit on our hands and wait for the government, which really doesn't have much of a track record of seeing beyond their special interest wallets, to decide whether or not such technology steps on their toes or not.

I don't see anything in Google's statement that specifies the privacy controls must be imposed by the government. It would also be consistent with this statement for them to come up with their own policies and controls and start allowing it.

It always amazes me how ignorant of the world around them people are. Are you aware there's a very good chance that any cop car passing you is scanning your license plate and doing an automatic lookup? That's something a lot scarier than a private citizen doing a facial recognition search so they can remember your name.

What about some creep stalker using it to learn things about you? I find that much scarier than a cop scanning license plates.

Don't use the camera or microphone to cross-reference and immediately present personal information identifying anyone other than the user, including use cases such as facial recognition and voice print

So I can just add a minor delay and make Google perfectly happy! Or, just give a notification about 'new faces available', and upon a wink overlay all the info... long as it isn't immediate

That is quite literally the only useful feature of Glass I could think - integration with my contacts so that I can know who I'm talking to. Those of use with poor facial memory need all the help we can get.

Glass wearers are pretty obvious now, but what are people going to do when it fits invisibly inside a regular pair of eyeglasses?

This. I was hoping that we finally had a technical method to help people with prosopagnosia.

That is quite literally the only useful feature of Glass I could think - integration with my contacts so that I can know who I'm talking to. Those of use with poor facial memory need all the help we can get.

Glass wearers are pretty obvious now, but what are people going to do when it fits invisibly inside a regular pair of eyeglasses?

More importantly what happens when the functions of Google Glass are all incorporated into an Ocular Implants? it is going to happen. It is only a matter of time.

I don't have a problem with Glass doing recognition, but this story sure glosses over the fact that Google's forbidding means pretty much nothing. Google or Apple doing something similar on their phone platforms would be a decently big deal, most people don't care to hack their phones. But Glass isn't a cheap phone used by common people, it's an experimental piece of hardware given out to the geekiest of the geeks. I think I'd rather Google stand strong behind their piece of technology than issue this stupid fake statement of forbidding.

What about some creep stalker using it to learn things about you? I find that much scarier than a cop scanning license plates.

Creeps will creep, regardless of the tech available to them. If someone wants to stalk you, there are more than enough information sources already available to them for them to get anything they want to know. In fact, this kind of thing has the potential to cut down on that kind of behavior, because it's inevitable that services will pop up that flag known creepers. So that guy coming up to you in a bar and pretending you went to HS together because his glass looked up some basic info will be flagged on your glass as a creep looking for some date rape.

There are pros and cons to all of this, and the bottom line is that this kind of tech can't be repressed or stopped at this point, so we might as well learn to deal with it. Like most tech advances it's both a lot less scary and a lot more scary than people's first reactions to it. Inevitably though, we'll just get used to it, accept it, and kids being born today will not be able to comprehend a time before heads up displays and automatic google searches for everything around them.

So Glass allows only Google-approved apps? Sort of a glass house, whose occupants might want to be careful about throwing the "walled garden" stone.

It's effectively Android, people can install what they want, but Google curates the store. These apps will probably exist, although without Google backing we probably won't see an "identify random strangers" app.

Quote:

I think I'd rather Google stand strong behind their piece of technology than issue this stupid fake statement of forbidding.

Especially given that they are already having to field panicked questions from senators, I think there's a danger that some really poorly thought-out laws will be passed that stifle technological advancement. One of Google's two main goals with regards to Glass at this point (the other being developing it) needs to be getting it out there without getting it banned.

I don't care about strangers, I just want it to work on people that I've been introduced to in the past. No need to go full Daemon, just the basics.

Me, too.

I wouldn't want people looking up data about strangers, but cross referencing it to people in my contact list? That's exactly what I'd want it to do.

Unfortunately, since Google is cross-referencing photos in Google+ profiles into their search results (like the authors of news articles), and you can add anyone to your own contacts list and *that's* linked to Google+, I'm not sure there's any legitimate way of corralling the feature down to only people you know.

Banning it will undoubtedly be struck down eventually (1st amendment protections for cameras and microphones in public places are pretty well established), and the technology is so ubiquitous and hard to detect that people up to no good will be using it anyway. Unless you ban all electronic devices, there's going to be no way to restrict this kind of thing. If you ban glasses, people will wear collars, belts, or headphones with cameras, etc. This is happening, nobody can stop it.

Wouldn't that be EXACTLY what this product should be used for by Security teams?

I mean .. military / federal usage aside, even private security firms in certain environments would benefit from this. You can make yourself a fake ID but if the security guard doesn't the same details pop up in his "Iron Man" esque HUD when looking at you then you got to answer some questions.

They can still do that. I doubt they'd want their app in the app store anyway.

Perhaps they are worried about recognition based on 3rd party datasets, which might enable things like virtual clouds of floating credit scores above people's heads on public streets.

Does Glass have the computing power to do facial recognition locally? I doubt it. I suspect it requires the query to be sent to a more powerful system elsewhere, and that inherently means you are providing someone with information about the location and possibly activities of 3rd parties. Possibly a photo of that person (in principle you could extract just the face and send only that).

If it could do it locally based on locally-stored data, that would be a fairly responsible way to do it.